The Budget 2009 Tax Proposals and Activity in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS)

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 113

Taxation and Total Government Take from the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) Following Phase 3 of the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS)

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 117

Economic Principles and Determination of Infrastructure Third Party Tariffs in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS)

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 116

An Optimised Illustrative Investment Model Of The Economics Of Integrated Returns From CCS Deployment In The UK/UKCS

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 118

The Effects of Budget 2011 on Activity in the UK Continental Shelf

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 120

The Economics of CO2-EOR Cluster Developments in the UK Central North Sea/ Outer Moray Firth

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 123

The Long Term Prospects for Activity in the UK Continental Shelf

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 119

A Futuristic Least-cost Optimisation Model of CO2 Transportation and Storage in the UK/UK Continental Shelf

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 112

The Prospects for Activity in the UK Continental Shelf to 2040: the 2009 Perspective

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 114

The Effects of the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) on Activity in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) and CO2 Leakage

NORTH SEA STUDY OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 115

Financial health, exports, and rm survival: Evidence from UK and French firms

We use firm level data to assess the role of exporting in the link between financial health and rm survival. The data are for the UK and France. We examine whether fi rms at diff erent stages of export activity (starters, exiters, continuers, switchers) react di fferently to changes in financial variables. In general, export starters and exiters experience much stronger adverse e ffects of fi nancial constraints for their survival prospects. By contrast, the exit probability of continuous exporters and export switchers is less negatively a ffected by financial characteristics. These relationships between exporting, finance and survival are broadly similar in the British and French sub-samples.

Testing the Tunnel Effect: Comparison, Age and Happiness in UK and German Panels

In contrast to previous results combining all ages we find positive effects of comparison income on happiness for the under 45s, and negative effects for those over 45. In the BHPS these coefficients are several times the magnitude of own income effects. In GSOEP they cancel to give no effect of effect of comparison income on life satisfaction in the whole sample, when controlling for fixed effects, and time-in-panel, and with flexible, age-group dummies. The residual age-happiness relationship is hump-shaped in all three countries. Results are consistent with a simple life cycle model of relative income under uncertainty.

Age, Life-satisfaction, and Relative Income – Insights from the UK and Germany

We first confirm previous results with the German Socio-Economic Panel by Layard et al. (2010), and obtain strong negative effects of comparison income. However, when we split the sample by age, we find quite different results for reference income. The effects on lifesatisfaction are positive and significant for those under 45, consistent with Hirschman’s (1973) ‘tunnel effect’, and only negative (and larger than in the full sample) for those over 45, when relative deprivation dominates. Thus for young respondents, reference income’s signalling role, indicating potential future prospects, can outweigh relative deprivation effects. Own-income effects are also larger for the older sample, and of greater magnitude than the comparison income effect. In East Germany the reference income effects are insignificant for all. With data from the British Household Panel Survey, we confirm standard results when encompassing all ages, but reference income loses significance in both age groups, and most surprisingly, even own income becomes insignificant for those over 45, while education has significant negative effects.